Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!ima!johnl From: lbl-helios!vern@lbl-rtsg.arpa (Vern Paxson) Newsgroups: comp.compilers Subject: Re: LEX behaviour when given "large" automata. Message-ID: <916@ima.ISC.COM> Date: 19 Mar 88 00:26:47 GMT Sender: johnl@ima.ISC.COM Reply-To: Vern Paxson Lines: 28 Approved: compilers@ima.UUCP Philippe Schnoebelen writes: > I'm having some problems with LEX. When my number of keywords/regexps is > growing, the lexical analyzer begins to give strange, unexpected, (let's > face it, wrong) results. and John adds: > It [lex] > could stand serious rewriting which, to the best of my knowlege, it has never > received. Well, let me plug flex, my lex replacement now in beta-test. It should be able to handle very large inputs correctly, and generates its scanners substantially faster than lex does. It's available via anonymous ftp from lbl-rtsg.arpa and uunet, as flex.beta.Z. Philippe, if you can't get to either of these I'll try sending it to you via mail. Vern Vern Paxson vern@lbl-csam.arpa Real Time Systems ucbvax!lbl-csam.arpa!vern Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory (415) 486-6411 -- Send compilers articles to ima!compilers or, in a pinch, to Levine@YALE.EDU Plausible paths are { ihnp4 | decvax | cbosgd | harvard | yale | bbn}!ima Please send responses to the originator of the message -- I cannot forward mail accidentally sent back to compilers. Meta-mail to ima!compilers-request